M5M5
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 07/29/05
Posts: 11736
|
|
See...that's an excellent solution...and hopefully your ex will agree. It SHOULD be left up to the parents, not the courts. Let us know how it goes!
|
Redlegg
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 10/05/06
Posts: 26804
|
|
I am willing to drop cs when my son turns 18 if I can be left to determine what I can contribute with my son and not be ordered to pay 50% of a school I'm unable to afford.
I thought the order dropped it at 18, or at least when he graduates from HS. Are you willing to drop CS, or willing to not try to modify....
CS support is an interesting thing, the court determines what an NCP can afford, and rightfully so. But now the possibility of a court deciding what a parent can afford for college sounds crazy....
Follow the existing order, you both agree to contribute what you think you can afford. The child should borrow, or contribute the rest, which he can determine by what he can afford. Go into it in good faith, and and put the realities up front. If the child chooses a CC for the first two years, and then transfers, great, if he lives with you during college, then you contribute less, because you won't be getting CS, and you will still have some of his expenses, if he lives out of the house, you can contribute more. Parents should not be forced to pay for a voluntary, post secondary education against their will, it is one more case of the Government deciding they know better than you, what you should do with your money, and how to raise your children.
|
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14714
|
|
CS support is an interesting thing, the court determines what an NCP can afford, and rightfully so. But now the possibility of a court deciding what a parent can afford for college sounds crazy....
-----------------------------------------------------
Yes, maybe... A court still determines what a NCP "rightfully" owes even when the child is living on campus out of the parent's residence. Shouldn't a court then determine what BOTH parents rightfully owe (if CS is continued through college for the NCP), instead of just for one parent???
In the OP's case I would say CS is continued through college (based on whatever the law is) and then the CP uses that money plus whatever her share should be towards college tuition. OR CS is stopped and BOTH parents contribute what they want or feel they should in regards to college costs.
I think the OP realized what it a struggle it would be if she was made to pay for 50% of her son's college costs by a court's decision. Maybe that can be an eye opener for many CP's--- most don't realize that "feeling" is what a NCP has to deal with when they are ordered by the courts to pay CS and college costs.
I don't agree that ANY parent should be ORDERED to pay college costs for an adult child. How ridiculous in general. We are not MADE to pay for college costs in an intact family, why should be forced to in a divorced setting?
|
BeckaLeigh32
member
Reged: 03/15/11
Posts: 119
|
|
If you can't afford for him to go to a $60k/year college, tell your son you can't afford it and won't be able to help much. Your son needs to either get loans for most of it or scale back and look at colleges that don't cost $60k/year.
I realize you don't make that much a year, but how in the heck can you even expect your X to continue paying you CS AND paying 50% of your son's college? He is not an open wallet for you. I would NEVER expect my X to do that, and he wouldn't. I would never WANT someone to expect that out of me.
|
whp
recently joined
Reged: 04/15/11
Posts: 13
|
|
Like I said before I'm agreeable to dropping support at 18 if both parents are allowed to contribute what they deem affordable for college.
My CS order goes to 23 in Massachusetts as long as the child is in college. I'm willing to drop that as long as I'm not ordered to pay for 50% of a college.
I have told my son what I can afford, it is the ncp that feels myself and my current husband should contribute 50% of college tuition and expenses he and my son agree upon. They are focused on the name and reputation of the institution.
|
Redlegg
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 10/05/06
Posts: 26804
|
|
A court still determines what a NCP "rightfully" owes even when the child is living on campus out of the parent's residence. Shouldn't a court then determine what BOTH parents rightfully owe (if CS is continued through college for the NCP), instead of just for one parent???
CS should not continue past the age of majority or HS graduation whichever comes first..that should be up to the parents to decide what they can afford with their money. If the courts said they should buy a car, or anything else, after they have provided for the child his whiole life, it just sounds crazy as well. I know some states do it. I just do not agree with it.
CS has to be a racket. I mean why will they take an NCP who goes to jail, and continue to enforce CS orders, but for a married parent, they do no such thing. If you are amrried and go to jail, no support for your family, no order, no big deal, if you have a support order, it continues....strange things in the business of CS...makes you wonder if it really is about the children.
My CS order goes to 23 in Massachusetts as long as the child is in college. I'm willing to drop that as long as I'm not ordered to pay for 50% of a college.
I'm confused why it should end completely when it states it should continue if the child is enrolled in secondary education.
Those are two different things, secondary education is high school, does your order say 23 as long as he is in college or does it say it is in effect as long as he is enrolled in a secondary school. Secondary education is not college.
|
finz
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/17/08
Posts: 6495
|
|
[quote]But think about what that SAYS to him, "I am willing to pay a higher percentage as long as you are willing to give me tax free money to PAY that higher percentage." [/quote]
I didn't say that.
I said give two different bottom lines..... with AND without CS being in the mix.
Paying a higher percentage comes in if she gives a maximum she can contribute IF ds goes to a $60,000 school, then ds decides to go to UMass and her ex still figures she should pay her max......
ie.....If her max is $10,000 of her own money
She could contribute $10,000 plus ALL of the CS ($10,000/year) which would give son $20,000 toward the $60,000 needed for his high priced school, so he would need another $40,000 from dad or a lot of scholarship/loans on his own.
If they agree to end CS, she still only has $10,000 to contribute, so dad would save the $10,000 in CS, but might have to come up with $50,000 for college( depending on the scholarship/loan issues).
So, with full CS, she would pay 1/3 of the expensive school.
Without CS she would pay 1/6th.
Either way, ex would be paying the same amount overall and a higher percentage.
If son then decides to go to UMass, then mom's $10,000 and continued CS of $10,000 would mean dad isn't contributing ANY extra for college
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30378
|
|
I guess what bugs me about that is you are saying, $10K from Mom, $10K from CS and $40K from Dad, as thought child support is coming from somewhere else other than Dad.
ETA: One fo the major differences being an extra $10K Dad can claim as educational expenses on his taxes, which he CANNOT do if he pays her in child support.
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
Edited by gr8Dad (04/20/11 06:36 PM)
|
whp
recently joined
Reged: 04/15/11
Posts: 13
|
|
Those are two different things, secondary education is high school, does your order say 23 as long as he is in college or does it say it is in effect as long as he is enrolled in a secondary school. Secondary education is not college.
Order says 23 as long as he is enrolled in college.
I guess what bugs me about that is you are saying, $10K from Mom, $10K from CS and $40K from Dad, as thought child support is coming from somewhere else other than Dad.
I'm not saying his dad has to pay $40K, his dad can contribute what he wants to his sons education. I feel I should contribute what I want and he should contribute what he wants. My argument is that he feels I should contribute 50% of the cost of whatever school my sons wishes to attend. It has been the ncp who has pushed for the $60K schools. I have tried to convince him to go to UMass or other schools with a lower tuition.
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30378
|
|
"I feel I should contribute what I want and he should contribute what he wants."
That is interesting, because at the beginning or this thread, you wanted to take it to court and have him ORDERED to pay an amount in percentage with his income. What changed?
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
[Re: 
Edit
Reply
Quote
